Medical Questions > Debate Forums > General Debate Forum

Wearing Fur, Etc (Page 1)

Just as an after thought from another thread in the abortion debate section. It is regarding Wearing Fur

I think in todays western "first world" culture we do not need fur skin coats etc to keep us warm we have man made synthetic clothing to do that and it is wrong to kill animals for fashion accessories.

Personally I dont want to make wearing fur ilegal, but it would be good if people didnt buy fur etc and some organisation was set up so that the skins of the animals we kill for food could be taken to other less developed countrys where they need it and do not have the technology to manufacture man made synthetic substitutes.

Just a thought
Did you find this post helpful?
|

User Profile
replied September 22nd, 2008
Supporter
I DO think that fur should be illegal. There is no need to kill animals as trophies and the ecological balance is way off kilter already. Fur coats are elitist and archaic.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 22nd, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
while i agree with you the ramifications of making wearing fur illegal could be desasterous. Imagine if something dreadful happened in society where we could no longer manufacture synthetic clothes, or made synthetic cloathing so expensive the ordniary man couldnt cloth himself, if fur were illegal then he would freeze to death.

Same goes for hunting, in the uk we have banned hunting, in principle there is no need, its become a sport instead of a need but... god forbid something happened where the ordinary man could no longer afford to buy food from the supermarket.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied September 22nd, 2008
Supporter
Well, laws are flexible according to the needs of the society, right? I've seen laws change in 3 months where I live (Eastern Europe)...especially around tax time!
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 22nd, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
Re: Wearing Fur, Etc
Gu£st wrote:
Just as an after thought from another thread in the abortion debate section. It is regarding Wearing Fur

I think in todays western "first world" culture we do not need fur skin coats etc to keep us warm we have man made synthetic clothing to do that and it is wrong to kill animals for fashion accessories.

I have no problem with people wearing fur, as long as the animals are also killed for food. I believe every part of an animal should be used and just killing an animl for its fur is wrong.

Personally I dont want to make wearing fur ilegal, but it would be good if people didnt buy fur etc and some organisation was set up so that the skins of the animals we kill for food could be taken to other less developed countrys where they need it and do not have the technology to manufacture man made synthetic substitutes.

This would be a good idea!
Just a thought
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 22nd, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
"Well, laws are flexible according to the needs of the society, right? I've seen laws change in 3 months where I live (Eastern Europe)...especially around tax time! "

Supposedly so, but I live in the Uk, where the poorer are still subserviant to the rich to a degree. but in the past british law has been cruel to its people and the people it has foisted itself upon, the Indians and the Irish, and the scots are just a few. Our government is not the government of the people but her majesties government and if they want us to be under their complete control a law not allowing us to hunt or wear fur would potentially make us dependent upon them for food and clothing..... when your history is littered with attrocities against their own people, you dont like to ban such things even if they appear to be not needed.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied September 24th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
What ARE you banging on about? The UK isn't perfect but I think you're being a wee bit paranoid here...
|
Did you find this post helpful?
Users who thank Jules for this post: homerx 

replied September 24th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
better to be paranoid than a surf again
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied September 24th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Gu£st wrote:
better to be paranoid than a surf again


Yeeeeesssss... Rolling Eyes
|
Did you find this post helpful?
Users who thank Jules for this post: homerx 

User Profile
replied September 24th, 2008
Experienced User
a surf?

are you talking about colonialism and it's effect on the lifestyles of indigenous people?

if so then i can agree with that somewhat. there are people in the north who actually wear fur because they remember how to go out and hunt and prepare the hide or fur, which is warmer than any expensive synthetic fabric. these people pay extreme prices for any groceries or other goods that have to be shipped there, sometimes by plane because there are no roads in summer. also, it is part of a lifestyle that has persisted and sustained them and their ancestors for thousands upon thousands of years. they aren't the cause of animal endangerment or extinction due to loss of habitat and climate change so it's somewhat unfair to create laws that make them have to change when people in the south refuse to.


maybe they should just outlaw the places that breed animals for fur like mink farms and such. j-lo doesn't need to wear 50 chinchillas to keep her warm in LA.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 25th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
killbill, i agree with you. but i was more on about fudralism and its effect on the lower classes. Britain used to be a fudral system, the lords and big land owners virtually owned the people who lived on and worked on their land, some would treat them really bad, make them wear Iron necklets, just give them enough to eat ect it was all about control.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied September 25th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Gu£st wrote:
killbill, i agree with you. but i was more on about fudralism and its effect on the lower classes. Britain used to be a fudral system, the lords and big land owners virtually owned the people who lived on and worked on their land, some would treat them really bad, make them wear Iron necklets, just give them enough to eat ect it was all about control.


So odd you are worried about control and servitude considering your beliefs that women's choices should be up to other people, not themselves.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
Users who thank Birch for this post: homerx 

User Profile
replied September 25th, 2008
Supporter
O.o! Birch – 1, Guast – 0
gosign Birch, gosign !

perfect10 2thumbs
|
Did you find this post helpful?
Users who thank Beline for this post: homerx 

User Profile
replied September 26th, 2008
Experienced User
I don't think wearing fur in our society in today's culture is necessary, so why kill an animal for it? I was in a department store a couple days ago, and there were plenty of fur shrugs about, you know the posh ones to wear over a dress. Only a fashion item. Looks pretty, but serves no real purpose. Anyway I stroked one, it felt very soft, but only when I saw the tag did I realise that it wasn't fake, at least it wasn't indicated. I came across another one which was labelled faux fur, and looked exactly the same and felt just as soft, so why did they need to have real fur ones?
Ok I can understand freezing places where synthetic materials are not available, but fur is now mainly a fashion statement.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 26th, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
There is a difference between servitude and virtually enslavement.

I approve of servitude.

Servitude is done of the free will, enslavement against the will.

As for control, we need control otherwise anarchy and kaos would reign, resulting in tyranny. But with control comes responsiblity and a need of willingness to servitude in those controling... in order to serve the people not exploite the people, to benefit the people not oppress the people.....

"the greatest among you will by your servent" - Jesus Christ

I do not trust my government, i do not trust the lords, i do not trust the establishment or whoever controls the established order not to put us under the thumb, not when i recognise that we have been sold to banks. That we are slaves to the system through debt. The Iron coller has been replaced by a plastic card but at least our standard of living is good, but that can change very easily if the ecconomic system collapses which it is on the brink, hopefully it wont be as drastic as having to hunt for food or kill animals for clothing but you get my point, that if these things are illegal wearing fur, hunting, they are taking away our right to survival.

totally depending on the established order for the very basics.... total dependance equals total control, total control equals absolut power, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absoultly.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied September 27th, 2008
Supporter
You know what, Guast? I would really like to meet you in person. Just to see if you are really as.., well, the way you come across on the forum.
The world is overpopulated as it is. God said that we had to take care of the earth, right? My question to you is now: what are YOU doing to take care of it? What are YOU doing to make the world a better place? And of course, the answer that I’m still waiting for: what are you doing to lead people to Christ? Because is has been evident since I came to this forum that you have been doing nothing but put people off Christianity.

Anyway, I don’t believe it is lords and governments that ‘sold’ us to banks. Maybe we should all stop blame-shifting and be accountable for our debts. I have ‘plastic’ and I don’t consider it to be a collar. It’s quite useful if you are mature enough to use it responsibly. I know how much money I have in my account and I don’t spend it if I don’t have it. Easy as pie.

And I have to agree with Jules. You are a little paranoid. I seriously doubt whether a disaster will hit the earth and government will have us starve and die due to exposure to the elements, just because of a silly law. You have to agree that it is a little ridiculous. Anyway, no law will keep me from killing an animal if my child is cold. But I guess I would then be thrown in jail and tortured medieval way, right? giggle
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied September 27th, 2008
Experienced User
are there even any wild animals left in europe? i was in england once and saw what their idea of a forest was with it's manicured lawns and pruned trees and i can't imagine anyone hunting in that. when you see the forests here, you can't see 10 feet ahead of you because the trees and undergrowth are so thick. you would be lost in a minute if you didn't know how to navigate the woods. there is still a lot of habitat in parts of canada for wild animals to live without coming into contact with humans. with the lack of habitat in parts of europe, it only makes sense to outlaw killing whatever wild animals are left.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 2nd, 2008
Supporter
That’s the point I’m trying to make. Thanks, Killbill. Everybody is up in arms about animal rights, but they seem to be stuck in the ‘don’t wear fur-’ and ‘don’t abuse them physically-’thing.
How about their natural habitat that we’re taking over – at the speed of light, I might add. Maybe we should be more concerned with keeping our own numbers down. You know; having one or two children instead of seven.
And of course not using products that can harm the environment. We don’t have a swimming pool because of all the chemicals you need to keep it clean. We recycle, limit our use of plastic bags to the bear minimum, and we make our own fertilizer for our garden. The plants in our garden is indigenous as not to disturb nature ect.
And alas, I only have one child. Factory closed, tubes tied. Amen.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied October 3rd, 2008
Active User, very eHealthy
"what are you doing to lead people to Christ? Because is has been evident since I came to this forum that you have been doing nothing but put people off Christianity"

Its not my job to bring people to Christ..... oh no, that is not a Christians possition, it is to bring Christ, i.e Christian philosophy to people, then they can decide if they want to follow that philosophy or not. I can not convert anyone, conversion comes from within not from without. All I can do is state the case.

"You know what, Guast? I would really like to meet you in person. Just to see if you are really as.., well, the way you come across on the forum. "

and how is that, opinionated, obstenate. In person you probably wouldn't think I am the same unless you got to know me or asked me. I am not a public preacher in city centers or things like that, I am very helpful person, quiet willing to anything for anybody. I am not a very good speaker, I jumble my sentences, make mistakes, often times stutter, when put on the spot often my desire for a reply makes me loose my train of thought. I am a thinker, I am better with the writen word than speaking. Although not a good speller or good at grammer, I find i can get my point across much better in type than in speach.

"The world is overpopulated as it is"

you dont know that for sure, its only what you have been lead to believe.

"question to you is now: what are YOU doing to take care of it? What are YOU doing to make the world a better place?"

Very little actually, there is a lot more I could do.

"I have ‘plastic’ and I don’t consider it to be a collar"

We are the poorest people in the world, even those in africa have more than we do.... think about it.

"But I guess I would then be thrown in jail and tortured medieval way, right?"

Possibly, your right it happened in the medieval times, why not today.... is your reasoning simply because it happened in the medieval times, is that why you laugh?

Thats like when I was a child I laughed at flares because they were from the 60's, never could such dress sense be repeated, yet low and behold it is not so long ago that flares were in fashion.... history repeats itself or didnt you know that?

I laugh at your reasoning, your innocence/ignorance and trust in a system so corrupt its unbelievable, you may think I am parranoid and perhaps I am but better that way than an ignorant fool who thinks torture can not be repeated because it happend at a point in history.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied October 3rd, 2008
Supporter
Guast, I want you to take this reply in the light that I mean it, please. For a change I’m not attacking you.
You can lead people to Christ by just being yourself. There is no need to scare people like with the ‘to all people of all nations’ thread.
Take the Homerx thread for an example. I think it was Jules who said that she’s not religious, but Homer and Muthoni have given her a whole new perspective on Christianity.
How did they do it? Just by being themselves.
And I agree with you that it comes from within. Has anybody ever inspired you to be a better person? I try to let people see Christ in my life. Sometimes I fail miserably because I have a short fuse, but sometimes, when I see gratitude in somebody’s eyes for accepting them for who they are, I’m sure that they experience the love of Christ through me.

And if you feel like you could do more – do it. It’s better to give than to receive. It’s so rewarding. And it doesn’t have to cost you anything (moneywise) I’m a single mother. I just don’t have the means to give money. But I do have the means to go to kinder gardens and to ask the parents to donate any clothes their children has outgrown. I then see to it that these clothes go to the needy.
And yes, your spelling sucks. So does mine. That’s why I always type out my responses on a word document and then I do the ‘copy and paste’-thing. That way I learn while I type.
readprofile I’m from Africa. Not sure how the people here are ‘richer’ than anybody else. They fear for their lives on a daily basis. They go hunger and many are without shelter. They have low self worth and low self esteem, and very little hope.
Poor? Yes, they are.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
Users who thank Beline for this post: homerx 
12 >>